USPTO Patents Application 10646646

United States Patent and Trademark Office

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office

Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450

Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov

APPLICATION NO.

FILING DATE

FIRST NAMED INVENTOR

ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.

CONFIRMATION NO.

10/646,646

08/21/2003

Quentin J. Clark

MSFT-2734/305604.01

9792

41505 7590 09/25/2007

WOODCOCK WASHBURN LLP (MICROSOFT CORPORATION)
CIRA CENTRE, 12TH FLOOR
2929 ARCH STREET
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104-2891

EXAMINER

CORRIELUS, JEAN M

ART UNIT

2162

PAPER NUMBER

MAIL DATE

DELIVERY MODE

09/25/2007 PAPER

Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.

The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.

PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

Advisory Action
Before the Filing of an Appeal Brief

Application No.

10/646,646

Applicant(s)

CLARK ET AL

Examiner

Jean M. Corrielus

Art Unit

2162

-The MAILING DATE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address -

THE REPLY FILED 05 September 2007 FAILS TO PLACE THIS APPLICATION IN CONDITION FOR ALLOWANCE.

1 . The reply was filed after a final rejection, but prior to or on the same day as filing a Notice of Appeal. To avoid abandonment of
this application, applicant must timely file one of the following replies: (1) an amendment, affidavit, or other evidence, which
places the application in condition for allowance; (2) a Notice of Appeal (with appeal fee) in compliance with 37 CFR 41.31; or (3)
a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) in compliance with 37 CFR 1.114. The reply must be filed within one of the following
time periods:

a) Cj The period for reply expires months from the mailing date of the final rejection.

b) The period for reply expires on: (1) the mailing date of this Advisory Action, or (2) the date set forth in the final rejection, whichever is later. In
no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of the final rejection.

Examiner Note: If box 1 is checked, check either box (a) or (b). ONLY CHECK BOX (b) WHEN THE FIRST REPLY WAS FILED WITHIN

TWO MONTHS OF THE FINAL REJECTION. See MPEP 706.07(f).
Extensions of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1 . 1 36(a). The date on which the petition under 37 CFR 1 . 1 36(a) and the appropriate extension fee
have been filed is the date for purposes of determining the period of extension and the corresponding amount of the fee. The appropriate extension fee
under 37 CFR 1.17(a) is calculated from: (1) the expiration date of the shortened statutory period for reply originally set in the final Office action; or (2) as
set forth in (b) above, if checked. Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of the final rejection, even if timely filed,
may reduce any earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1 .704(b).
NOTICE OF APPEAL

2. □ The Notice of Appeal was filed on . A brief in compliance with 37 CFR 41 .37 must be filed within two months of the date of

filing the Notice of Appeal (37 CFR 41 .37(a)), or any extension thereof (37 CFR 41 .37(e)), to avoid dismissal of the appeal. Since
a Notice of Appeal has been filed, any reply must be filed within the time period set forth in 37 CFR 41.37(a).
AMENDMENTS

3. ^ The proposed amendment(s) filed after a final rejection, but prior to the date of filing a brief, will not be entered because

(a) [X] They raise new issues that would require further consideration and/or search (see NOTE below);

(b) D They raise the issue of new matter (see NOTE below);

(c) □ They are not deemed to place the application in better form for appeal by materially reducing or simplifying the issues for

appeal; and/or

(d) □ They present additional claims without canceling a corresponding number of finally rejected claims.

NOTE: See Continuation Sheet . (See 37 CFR 1.116 and 41.33(a)).

4. O The amendments are not in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121. See attached Notice of Non-Compliant Amendment (PTOL-324).

5. □ Applicant's reply has overcome the following rejection(s): .

6. □ Newly proposed or amended claim(s) would be allowable if submitted in a separate, timely filed amendment canceling the

non-allowable claim(s).

7. D For purposes of appeal, the proposed amendment(s): a) □ will not be entered, or b) □ will be entered and an explanation of

how the new or amended claims would be rejected is provided below or appended.
The status of the claim(s) is (or will be) as follows:

Claim(s) allowed: .

Claim(s) objected to: .

Claim(s) rejected: .

Claim(s) withdrawn from consideration: .

AFFIDAVIT OR OTHER EVIDENCE

8. □ The affidavit or other evidence filed after a final action, but before or on the date of filing a Notice of Appeal will not be entered

because applicant failed to provide a showing of good and sufficient reasons why the affidavit or other evidence is necessary and
was not earlier presented. See 37 CFR 1 .1 16(e).

9. □ The affidavit or other evidence filed after the date of filing a Notice of Appeal, but prior to the date of filing a brief, will not be

entered because the affidavit or other evidence failed to overcome all rejections under appeal and/or appellant fails to provide a
showing a good and sufficient reasons why it is necessary and was not earlier presented. See 37 CFR 41 .33(d)(1).

10. □ The affidavit or other evidence is entered. An explanation of the status of the claims after entry is below or attached.
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION/OTHER

1 1 . □ The request for reconsideration has been considered but does NOT place the application in condition for allowance because:

12. □ Note the attached Information Disclosure Statement(s). (PTO/SB/08) Paper No(s).

13. □ Other: . ^

JeS^M Corrielus
Primary Examiner
Art Unit: 2162

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
PTOL-303 (Rev. 08-06)

Advisory Action Before the Filing of an Appeal Brief

Part of Paper No. 20070919

Continuation Sheet (PTO-303) Application No. 10/646,646

Continuation of 3. NOTE: the amendment filed on September 5, 2007, raises new issue that requires further search and consideration.

2